linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] filesystems: use has_capability_noaudit interface for reserved blocks checks

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <491D2F09.3070104@yandex.ru>
Date:	Fri, 14 Nov 2008 09:55:53 +0200
From:	Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind@...dex.ru>
To:	Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sct@...hat.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, adilger@....com, tytso@....edu,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, dedekind@...radead.org,
	ext-adrian.hunter@...ia.com, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
	dushistov@...l.ru, jmorris@...ei.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] filesystems: use has_capability_noaudit interface for
 reserved blocks checks

Eric Paris wrote:
> ext[2,3,4], ufs, and ubifs all check for  CAP_SYS_RESOURCE to determine
> if they should allow reserved blocks to be used.  A process not having
> this capability is not failing some security decision and should not be
> audited.  Thus move to using has_capability_noaudit.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>
> ---

UBIFS part looks OK, as long as the whole idea of the patch is right, which
I have not checked, but assume it is.

The only question is are you sure exporting 'cap_capable()' is relevant
to this patch? You do not seem to call it directly.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html